| Title |
Physiologic Effects of Dry Needling
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Pain and Headache Reports, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11916-013-0348-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Barbara Cagnie, Vincent Dewitte, Tom Barbe, Frank Timmermans, Nicolas Delrue, Mira Meeus |
| Abstract |
During the past decades, worldwide clinical and scientific interest in dry needling (DN) therapy has grown exponentially. Various clinical effects have been credited to dry needling, but rigorous evidence about its potential physiological mechanisms of actions and effects is still lacking. Research identifying these exact mechanisms of dry needling action is sparse and studies performed in an acupuncture setting do not necessarily apply to DN. The studies of potential effects of DN are reviewed in reference to the different aspects involved in the pathophysiology of myofascial triggerpoints: the taut band, local ischemia and hypoxia, peripheral and central sensitization. This article aims to provide the physiotherapist with a greater understanding of the contemporary data available: what effects could be attributed to dry needling and what are their potential underlying mechanisms of action, and also indicate some directions at which future research could be aimed to fill current voids. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 33% |
| Spain | 2 | 17% |
| Australia | 1 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 3 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 67% |
| Scientists | 2 | 17% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 303 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 303 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 51 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 17 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 4% |
| Other | 39 | 13% |
| Unknown | 148 | 49% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 64 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 15% |
| Sports and Recreations | 17 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 14 | 5% |
| Unknown | 150 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 94. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 February 2023.
All research outputs
#455,529
of 25,571,620 outputs
Outputs from Current Pain and Headache Reports
#21
of 915 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,221
of 209,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Pain and Headache Reports
#2
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,571,620 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 915 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 209,210 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.